Cosgrove -v- Ryan & anor [2008] IESC 2 (14 February 2008)

Cosgrove -v- Ryan & anor [2008] IESC 2 (14 February 2008)

The ESB was negligent in failing to ensure the overhead wires were at a reasonable height above the field, as required by its duty of care, and the plaintiff established a prima facie case of negligence. The plaintiff was contributorily negligent for failing to keep an eye on the chute immediately before passing under the wires, warranting a 25% reduction in liability.

Citation
[2008] IESC 2
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Thomas Cosgrove; Defendant/respondent: John Ryan; Defendant/respondent: Electricity Supply Board (ESB)
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
14 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal (personal Injuries Negligence) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Dismissal
Outcome
Appeal allowed and varied; finding of 75% liability against ESB and 25% contributory negligence against plaintiff; case remitted to High Court for assessment of damages.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Duty of Care, Personal Injury, Electricity Supply Liability
Tort Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Duty of Care Personal Injury Electricity Supply Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Cosgrove

Plaintiff/appellant

John Ryan

Defendant/respondent

Electricity Supply Board (ESB)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (personal Injuries Negligence) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ESB was negligent in maintaining overhead power lines at a height insufficient to prevent contact with normal agricultural machinery
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in failing to take precautions to avoid contact with the wires

Ratio Decidendi

The ESB was negligent in failing to ensure the overhead wires were at a reasonable height above the field, as required by its duty of care, and the plaintiff established a prima facie case of negligence. The plaintiff was contributorily negligent for failing to keep an eye on the chute immediately before passing under the wires, warranting a 25% reduction in liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed and varied; finding of 75% liability against ESB and 25% contributory negligence against plaintiff; case remitted to High Court for assessment of damages.

Orders

  • High Court order dismissing action set aside
  • ESB held 75% liable, plaintiff 25% contributorily negligent